Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Mar;296(2):457-471.
doi: 10.1007/s00438-020-01756-9. Epub 2021 Jan 20.

Double-digest RAD-sequencing: do pre- and post-sequencing protocol parameters impact biological results?

Affiliations

Double-digest RAD-sequencing: do pre- and post-sequencing protocol parameters impact biological results?

Tristan Cumer et al. Mol Genet Genomics. 2021 Mar.

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing technologies have opened a new era of research in population genetics. Following these new sequencing opportunities, the use of restriction enzyme-based genotyping techniques, such as restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq) or double-digest RAD-sequencing (ddRAD-seq), has dramatically increased in the last decade. From DNA sampling to SNP calling, the laboratory and bioinformatic parameters of enzyme-based techniques have been investigated in the literature. However, the impact of those parameters on downstream analyses and biological results remains less documented. In this study, we investigated the effects of sevral pre- and post-sequencing settings on ddRAD-seq results for two biological systems: a complex of butterfly species (Coenonympha sp.) and several populations of common beech (Fagus sylvatica). Our results suggest that pre-sequencing parameters (i.e., DNA quantity, number of PCR cycles during library preparation) have a significant impact on the number of recovered reads and SNPs, on the number of unique alleles and on individual heterozygosity. In the same way, we found that post-sequencing settings (i.e., clustering and minimum coverage thresholds) influenced loci reconstruction (e.g., number of loci, mean coverage) and SNP calling (e.g., number of SNPs; heterozygosity) but had only a marginal impact on downstream analyses (e.g., measure of genetic differentiation, estimation of individual admixture, and demographic inferences). In addition, replication analyses confirmed the reproducibility of the ddRAD-seq procedure. Overall, this study assesses the degree of sensitivity of ddRAD-seq data to pre- and post-sequencing protocols, and illustrates its robustness when studying population genetics.

Keywords: Bioinformatics; Laboratory protocol; Molecular biology; Next-generation sequencing.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Andrews K, Luikart G (2014) Recent novel approaches for population genomics data analysis. Mol Ecol 23(7):1661–1667 - PubMed
    1. Andrews KR, Hohenlohe PA, Miller MR, Hand BK, Seeb JE, Luikart G (2014) Trade-offs and utility of alternative RADseq methods: reply to Puritz et al. Mol Ecol 23(24):5943–5946 - PubMed
    1. Andrews KR, Good JM, Miller MR, Luikart G, Hohenlohe PA (2016) Harnessing the power of RADseq for ecological and evolutionary genomics. Nat Rev Genet 17(2):81–92 - PubMed - PMC
    1. Arnold B, Corbett-Detig RB, Hartl D, Bomblies K (2013) RADseq underestimates diversity and introduces genealogical biases due to nonrandom haplotype sampling. Mol Ecol 22(11):3179–3190 - PubMed
    1. Baird NA, Etter PD, Atwood TS, Currey MC, Shiver AL, Lewis ZA, Selker EU, Cresko WA, Johnson EA (2008) Rapid SNP discovery and genetic mapping using sequenced RAD markers. PLoS ONE 3(10):1–7

Substances

LinkOut - more resources